Well since no one else has responded, there are so many damn humans that would just love to be tested on for the money why should we test animals? Well the answer is because it's much more cost effective to test animals.

Peter Singer argues against animal testing with a utilitarian approach. Tom Regan argues against it with a deontological approach.

Cohen argues on behalf of animal testing, but his argument somewhat falls into some problems regarding what is classified as a kind. What logical approach can one use to seperate retarded humans from animals.. He basically fails to present a coherent argument on behalf of this.

What text do you use? If you use the same one as me, I can give you lots of good page numbers.

Personally, I believe in animal testing. As far as finding a good philisophical framework to support it, I've yet to do.

i think animals should be treated with far more respect then they are in the united states. their are rapists and murderers given rights in prison when they obviously not fit to be treated with such respect or any imo. test on the criminals that have done something wrong and not on defenceless animals. people have more potential anyways for testing because they have more in common biologicaly

Useful Searches

>
About Us>
>
In May of 1999 CK5 started out as a tribute to America's favorite 4x4 utility truck. Since then it has grown to be
a leader among full size Chevrolet K5 Blazer and GMC Jimmy web sites across the Internet. CK5 has since expanded
to include the C/K series GM Truck and Suburban as well as past and present GM models.
>>
With its technical articles, factory specifications, photo gallery, classifieds, active message forum, product
reviews and original automotive content it's an unbeatable source.